It has been a little
over a year and half since I have written a review for
Positive-Feedback. How the time does fly—especially when you are a
parent of a newborn. Hannah Jean was born August 3, 2006. While I would
never trade my daughter in for anything, I do have to say my audiophile
world has taken a hit now that much of my free time is taken up by
spending it with Hannah. After ten months of being a parent coupled with
Hannah growing up a bit, I have become less neurotic in hovering over
her. As a result, I am now finding some time (albeit minute) to listen
to music and evaluate gear.What better way to revisit my
reviewing duties than by looking at one of my favorite CD machines
Arcam's FMJ series.

The last time I had
my hand on a piece of Arcam gear was
Issue 17. In that
article I wrote how we were at the twilight of the Redbook digital age,
where many manufacturers were abandoning pure CD players in favor of the
more marketable universal or multi-format players. Yet here I was in
late 2004 looking at an integrated one box CD player—the Arcam CD-192.
Maybe CD wasn't really dead. Knowing that now many manufacturers have
returned to manufacturing or upgrading their current line of CD players,
I believe that Redbook CD is making a strong comeback! As I stated in my
last Arcam article, I believe this is due to DVD-A and SACD not living
up to its potential and hype. While there are a few manufacturers that
are holding on to these loosely supported formats, I myself am not
interested in owning a "universal" player unless it is a part of my home
theater system.

When it comes to
pure digital pleasure (at least in this reviewer's budget) I will stick
with a Redbook only CD player. Why? Because, for me, it is what I like
listening to the most. While some universal players are good, in fact
very good, none of them lit my wick like a pure CD player with all of
its technology wrapped up in CD rendering as opposed to a dying digital
format like SACD and DVD-A. Besides, with my main music investment in
Redbook CD and vinyl, it makes more sense investing in a format I am
already committed to as opposed to one that is on its way out. Maybe
that is why many manufacturers still have at least one of CD player in
their equipment lineup. One of these CD players that has captured my
interest and has been under this reviewer's radar is Arcam's current
model—the FMJ CD-36T.

I have always been a
fan of Arcam CD players ever since my first introduction to the Arcam
Alpha 9. It was my great friend and fellow PFO staffer Les Mertz
who introduced me to this very special CD player. Almost immediately the
Arcam Alpha 9 placed a lasting impression upon my audio soul. This
modestly priced CD player kept up with the big boys by doing what I
think was so hard to do for many players at that time, it sounded more
like music and less like digital. The Arcam 9 never disappointed me with
its robust bass, deep soundstage, fantastic layering of a complex
soundstage, and most importantly it did many things musically right.

Today I am looking
at the Arcam CD-36T (The "T" stands for text version) the replacement to Arcam's highly reviewed CD-33. Having read Les Mertz's review of the
CD-33
Issue 17, and hearing the player for myself in Les's system and
in mine as well, I was once again impressed with Arcam's assault upon
the digital world with the CD-33. If it were not for me being invested
in a another CD player, the CD-33 would have been on my short list to
purchase. In short, the Arcam CD-36T is a development from the highly
reviewed CD-33. Since Les Mertz goes into great detail in his article
discussing the CD-33 I urge readers to read his article for more
information. For the purpose of this article my focus will be upon the
CD-36T in how it compares to the CD 33 along with my current reference
the Electrocompaniet EMC-1 UP, along with a brief discussion of the EAR
acute "tube" CD player.

There are three
areas where the CD-36T differs from the CD-33. The upgraded power
supply, the chassis being made out of a proprietary material called
"Acousteel", and the use of "stealth mat" technology. Other than that,
the players are very similar. Similar to the CD-33 the CD-36 uses
Wolfson 8740 DACs. Both units use a total of 2 per channel in balanced
mode in order to reduce noise and improve linearity by averaging out
errors. As with most Arcam products the appearance of the CD-36 is
pretty utilitarian in design like the CD-33. On the other hand looks can
be deceiving. Where some manufacturers place a huge emphasis upon the
look of a player, Arcam does not. Arcam places the money where it
counts, into the design of the player that affects its sound. It is not
to say the player is ugly, it is not. One thing that I did notice right
away is how inert the chassis of the CD-36 is compared to other
similarly priced players. In my opinion, the chassis is about as dead as
it can get. In tapping the unit with my index finger the sound I get
back is a deep "thud". I am sure this is a result of Arcam's use of the
Acousteel chassis along with using Stealth Mat technology that is
located in key joint positions where the chassis of the player meets
with the top cover. The last big difference between the CD-36 and the
CD-33 is the 36's use of a more powerful power supply. This results in
better bass reproduction as compared to the CD-33.

So, how does it
sound? While the CD-36 does share a lot of the same traits of the CD-33,
for example, a large soundstage, great layering, an analog quality about
it that makes you forget it is digital, the biggest difference is in
bass reproduction. While the difference is not huge it is noticeable and
definitely an improvement. If I were to describe the CD-36 in a word it
would be vinyl. Why vinyl? It is because when listening to the CD-36 you
begin to wonder if you are listening to a digital CD player and begin to
understand how close some CD players are to approaching the sound of
your coveted LPs. Like good vinyl playback, instruments are well defined
without being overdone or etched with a sense of musical pace that seems
to be more analog or vinyl like what one would expect from a mid-priced
digital CD player. Maybe this is due to a great design of the CD-36
where digital artifacts are reduced to a minimum, or maybe it is due to
the way Arcam's engineers voiced the CD-36, or maybe a little of both?
One thing that is for sure is the CD-36 has got to be one of the best
and most analog like CD players I have ever heard under the $3000.00
price tag. It is that good! If I were to fault the CD-36 at all, it
would be that it errs on the side giving up a tad of detail and
articulation in exchange for getting the purity of the music right. In
short, the CD-36 is a highly musical CD player. Bearing this in mind, I
can listen to this player for hours on end without ever experiencing
listener's fatigue.

Does the CD-36 stand
up to other reference quality players like my Electrocompaniet EMC-1 or
one of my personal favorites--the EAR Acute "tubed" output CD player
that starts out as an Arcam player. While the Electocompanient is more
detail oriented, and a bit forward sounding, the CD-36 soundstage is
more laidback, warm, and with a touch of richness to it that is quite
pleasant to listen to. Especially for those extended marathon listening
sessions that go late into the wee hours of the morning. Please don't
get me wrong while the 36's imaging may not be as detailed or dramatic
as the EMC-1, it does image quite well with all of the instruments and
performers do occupy their respective places on the soundstage. The
CD-36 gives a smoother and different presentation as compared to the
EMC-1. To put it into other words, the EMC-1 is more Ying, whereas, the
CD-36 is more Yang while at the same time neither player is to the
extreme—both stay fairly close to center though each on opposite sides
of this spectrum. Personally I see a place for both perspectives, a deep
detail oriented reproduction like my EMC-1, or a more laidback and
warmer rendering like the CD-36 presents to the listener. Again, is this
a bad attribute? No, not to me. Truly, the CD-36 is easy on the ears and
a joy for the audio soul. It really is up to you which presentation is
best. That is why I always encourage readers to audition gear for
themselves prior to buying since your taste or agenda may be different
from mine

Once I get my hands
onto a piece of audio gear I like to take it on the road to my fellow
audiophile friends homes—especially those whose ears I really respect.
Why? I want to make sure what I am experiencing as an audio reviewer
regarding how a piece of gear sounds is not system dependent. One of
those friends I trust is fellow PFO staffer Les Mertz who has an
excellent system and a great pair of audiophile ears. As I stated
earlier in the article the CD-33 did stand toe to toe with the CD-36. In
fact, in most areas both players were identical with one exception—bass
reproduction. In the area of bass reproduction the CD-36 does have the
edge. Again, in Les's system the CD-36 had all of the great attributes
that I heard in my home—great soundstaging and instrument image
layering, along with the vinyl like warmth that seems to be a common
theme amongst Arcam FMJ products. This player is truly addictive!

Only one place did
the CD-36 not knock everyone's socks off, that was at my good friend Dan
Meinwald's home. As many of you know Dan Meinwald is the US importer for
EAR products. I have known Dan for over 8 years now, and have come to
respect his audiophile ears along with his uncanny ability to put
together some of the most musically engaging systems I have ever heard
each year at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES). When the opportunity
presents itself I try bring gear over to Dan's house for that true
"acid" test. Could the CD-36 stand up to Dan's current reference the EAR
Acute? As many of you can recall the Acute starts out as an Arcam
player. (For more information regarding the EAR Acute take a look at Bob
Levi's review in
Issue 27.) However, once Tim De Paranvicini gets his magic hands
on it all that is left of the original player is the Wolfson DACs, the
transport, and the original main outer shell, other than that everything
else is redesigned including a fully balanced design all to the way to
the XLR output. Oh, how I wish the CD-36 had an XLR output--it does not,
only two pair of RCA outputs which are quite nice, and one optical
(toslink) and one coax digital output just in case you would want to use
the CD-36 as a transport.

Once in Dan's
system, we allowed the CD-36 to warm up a bit—about 30 minutes. Shortly
thereafter, Dan put on a series of music ranging from classical, to
rock, to jazz, all of which sounded great on the CD-36. Again, all of
the same attributes of the 36 were there: great soundstaging and
instrument imaging, great vocals, and that once again laidback analog
presentation. However, once we placed the EAR Acute into the rig things
were never the same. Have you ever hot-rodded a piece of gear--you know
what I mean changing caps, resistors, etc? If everything has gone right
with your upgrade what you have now is bigger and better than what you
had in the past—meaning you have corrected errors of omission, errors of
submission, or maybe a little of both. It short, all of the products
weaknesses have been eliminated or minimized. That is exactly how I
remember the EAR Acute as compared to the CD-36. The Acute had a larger
more three-dimensional soundstage, instrument imaging was deeper, and
with better clarity resulting in a natural harmonic reproduction that
allows the listener to hear their recording like they never had in the
past. The Acute is truly transcendental at times where it extends all of
the Arcam CD-36's attributes to another level and beyond!

Yes, the E.A.R. Acute
is that good! However, then again for it should be that good!
This is not an inexpensive CD player as is the Electrocompaniet for that
matter with both players approaching almost $6000 US. Food for thought!
I would love to own a 5-series BMW. However, my budget limits what I can
spend. Therefore, I settled for a MazdaSpeed6. Is the MazdaSpeed6 a BMW?
No. However, it is still fun to drive and it is fast. I look at the
CD-36 the same way. While it is not a giant killer, it still possesses
excellent value for the money. That in and of itself, is quite the
accomplishment! Let's remember the CD-36 retails for $2000
US and the E.A.R. Acute is almost three times the price at $5500 US. So,
for almost one third the price of the E.A.R. Acute or my Electrocompanient
EMC-1 UP ($6000 US) the Arcam is a rockin' bargain. If you can afford
the more expensive players like the Acute or the EMC-1 go for it, but if
you have financial limits or just think spending over $2500
for a CD player is nuts then maybe the CD-36 is the player for you. I am
in love. Maybe that is why I purchased mine, which can only serve as my
highest recommendation! Jeff Parks